Re: [ga] Re: "political advantage"

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 15:03 17/09/01 -0700, Mike Roberts wrote:

>Terrorists do vote; they infiltrate democratic institutions and processes 
>while they are putting their attack together.  The openness of free 
>universities plays into their hands.  Our German colleagues have been 
>learning over the weekend about the Islamic fundamentalist sect that 
>operated at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg and sent three of 
>themselves as suicide hijackers to the U.S.

We have been discussing  issues of stakeholder representation  here. I fail 
to see the connection with the openness of Universities in the Western world.

<snip>
>As Americans go back to work, we are not going back to the same 
>world.  Our civil liberties are not what we casually thought they were a 
>week ago.  Travelers this morning are having their possessions searched at 
>airports all over the country down to the last nail file. In the next few 
>days, the Congress is going to give new powers to law enforcement to 
>invade our personal lives looking for the very few who choose to attack 
>us. When I get on the plane next Sunday to go to Washington, I will know 
>that the new orders to the Air Force are to shoot it down if hijacked.

Ay.  The United States, stung by the scorpion, slapping at itself. Just 
what the terrorist intended.


<snip>

>So if I sound angry and self-righteous about the all-too-frequent trash on 
>this list, I am.  This anonymous narcissistic garbage is not an exercise 
>of freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.

Some of it is, yes. We learn to filter. Would you like to see a stricter 
censorship of postings? Or do you prefer to see the GA as irrelevant, 
thanks to such postings?


>Life at ICANN isn't going to be the same either.  Given the military 
>mindset and anti-terrorist measures in Washington and other capitals, 
>there is going to be a much greater stress on operational oversight of the 
>DNS, on stability and on synchronization with related Internet security 
>steps. There is going to be much less interest in who is represented by 
>whom on the Board.

This may be true, but it is regrettable none the less. Ultimately stability 
comes with agreements among parties affected.
Instability is brought on by resentment.
Security in an open and free world is an illusion.


>The GA, bastion of rugged individualism, has an opportunity to contribute 
>to the solutions to these challenges.  But if you're not interested in 
>being part of common solutions and the compromises involved in them, and 
>if throwing rocks at me for being the messenger of the new reality gives 
>you a bigger thrill, go right ahead and lay a claim to irrelevance.

Mike, I think it is appreciated that you deign to post here at all.
But messengers "of the new reality" are aplenty now.

Would you be willing to  act as a messenger of the USG and tell this global 
forum of people that are all part of ICANN  what common solutions and 
compromises are needed?



Joop Teernstra LL.M.
Councillor
InternetNZ

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html